Josh Brodesky: Guerena family deserves an answer

Maybe, as it's been alleged, Jose Guerena was part of a
home-invasion ring with family members, ripping and running with
body armor and assault weapons, posing as law enforcement.

But all we know, more than two weeks after SWAT officers shot
him 60 times, is that Guerena was a Marine who served in Iraq and
had no criminal record. We know he worked the night shift at the
Asarco Mission Mine, and he was a father and husband.

We know that what SWAT officers said they found in Guerena's
home - guns, body armor, a piece of law enforcement clothing, a
portrait of Jesus Malverde, "the narco saint," under his bed -
might be suggestive of home invasions, but certainly are not
illegal.

Could Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik have bungled the
explanation for this shooting any worse? His department first said
Guerena fired at the SWAT officers. Then it said he didn't. The
officers now say he raised his gun with the safety on and pointed
it at them. Since the correction, Dupnik has refused to comment on
what went down.

"I have to do what I think is right to protect the case to
ensure that it has the opportunity to progress where we think it
should go," he told me Friday, explaining his silence.

Dupnik said he was withholding comment because his department is
continuing with its criminal investigation into the alleged
home-invasion ring. Meanwhile, the Pima County Attorney's Office is
investigating the shooting. And a shooting board, made up of
commanders from the various agencies involved with the SWAT
incident, is also investigating. Dupnik said it wouldn't make any
sense to talk to the public before talking to the shooting
board.

Besides the wall of silence, court documents and the search
warrant for the home have been sealed. The Star plans to sue for
those records.

Dupnik said opening up those documents would put someone's life
at risk. An informant? Presumably, but he wouldn't say.

"I don't know when they are going to be unsealed, if ever," he
said. "Those are the real sensitive parts of why we are having
difficulty with trying to put information out publicly - because we
don't want to get somebody killed."

That would make sense, except Michael Storie, the attorney for
the SWAT officers, gave a press conference Thursday to provide
details of the May 5 shooting.

When I asked Dupnik if anything Storie said at that presser
undermined the criminal investigation or other concerns, all he
said was, "No."

So then why not at least release that information?

After all, Dupnik said he understands "there is a huge public
interest fueled by the press" about a shooting where officers fired
71 rounds in seven seconds. And he said he understands that "we
gave some bad information on a very critical issue."

But clearly he doesn't. Otherwise we wouldn't have Storie tap
dancing for reporters, explaining how the shooting went down.

Among other things, Storie said Guerena raised his AR-15 rifle
and said, "I have something for you. I have something for you
guys."

Two of the officers thought they saw the rifle fire. Why? No one
knows. Some of the hypothetical explanations Storie gave - The
muzzle flash of their own guns reflected off the scope of his;
their gunshots hit Guerena's gun, sending sparks flying - make no
sense because they would have happened after the cops started
shooting. Others, that officers saw a flash out of the corners of
their eyes or in a mirror, seem possible but improbable.

At some point a SWAT officer holding a shield fell, and the
other officers thought he had been shot. More shots were fired.
Guerena died while his wife pleaded with 911 for medical help.

Storie - no surprise here - sees this as "a clear-cut case" on
the shooting and on Guerena.

The guns, the law enforcement clothing, the portrait and the
body armor make a nifty equation.

"Put it together, and when you have drug rip-offs that
occasionally happen where people disguise themselves as law
enforcement officers, it all adds up," he said.

Guerena's alleged gun threat left officers with "no choice" but
to shoot.

"They are faced with a weapon pointed at them. What other choice
do they have?"

When the dust settles, Dupnik said, "You will see that we are
not hiding anything."

But he's already undermined that. A man was shot 60 times in his
own home, and we still don't know why.